Re: HTML 3.2

Dave Carter (dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk)
Thu, 9 May 1996 10:00:34 +0100 (BST)


Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 10:00:34 +0100 (BST)
From: Dave Carter <dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk>
To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTML 3.2
In-Reply-To: <199605090712.AAA27102@server.livingston.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.3.93.960509095159.17771E-100000@cass26>



On Thu, 9 May 1996, MegaZone wrote:

> 
> And using '3.2' helps put the nail in the coffin of the long defunct 3.0
> proposal.  3.0 had some good stuff - it also had some poorly thought out
> schemes, and it was unweildy.  3.2 covers bits of 3.0 that are in use,
> and provides an easy point to work from in introducing more.
> 

Well as far as I am concerned it doesn't because the functionality of 3.0
is much greater than 3.2, and at least one browser (arena) supports much
of the functionality that I require (mostly <math>). So as far as I am
concerned you can forget 3.2, I will stick to 3.0. There is a fundamental
divergance here between the scientific and technical world, which you
are not interested in, and the commercial world which I am not interested
in. Unfortunately your world has money, and mine doesn't. So I guess you
win. Unless there are enough people with the knowledge and the time to
develop specs and browsers for scientific and technical use only. 

Dave Carter